![]() ![]() Interactions with fish creates the feeling of being one with them. Graphical quality is adequate considering their budget animations and physics were fluid. Developers are explaining their narrative through the background and murals so you have to pay attention to your surroundings. Jokes aside, the artistical quality that is being presented in this game is mesmerizing. This makes the Abzû an exceptional experience for me. I never had a Sharkbro in any other game before. But I don't this one is a stellar example of it's type. In conclusion whether or not this game works is up to the viewer and their tastes. The controls were fine but clearly prioritized fluid animation over tight controls, another thing I'm not a fan of. People might mention how stunning the visuals are, and granted it definitely has its moments, but I didn't feel like it was conveying more than "animals majestic, ruins stoic". Something about it felt flat compared to, again, Journey. One of the big selling points of these types of games, the music, didn't grab me. Even if you haven't played Journey, why not watch a nature documentary? The game certainly likes taking away camera control to make it feel more as such. My point is that this sort of experience has been explored before, and in much better form. My point isn't that a game can't focus on providing an experience rather than what I'm describing. This is where I have to stop and address an elephant. The level design and "puzzles" are cookie cutter stuff, with pretty much nothing in terms of interesting ideas. The past decade of story driven indie games have carved out conventions that Abzu revels in. But you take a look at Abzu, and even before playing it, it was already familiar. Games having inspirations can be a great thing, especially if those inspirations are more mechanical or design in nature. But by and large this is a product of *too much* inspiration. This time it was in water! I don't want to be too glib, there are elements that are original. And a bit of Flower, if you've played that. To say nothing of the prevalence of the monomyth, this is Journey. The Hieroglyphic-esque depictions of a race inadvertently dooming the world (or nature), a small sparkly eyed creature experiencing the beauty of the world, far from harm, it trespassing on the dangers unknown, overcoming struggles, learning of a past civilization and their fall, attempting to undo the blight on the world, failing, and then succeeding in a triumphant blare of music and color, returning the world to its rightful beauty. That sounds harsh, it's not a bad game persay, just one that is treading on well worn ground-or, umm-water. But it should be noted how empty a game this is once you compare how closely it huddles in the conventions of games before it. I don't want to speculate about developer intentions, where inspiration stops and less savory things begin and whatnot. I think the game gets stronger as it goes on, but consequently the second half is the most like the other games, with some beats being nearly identical. I feel bad comparing the two but the similarity is so-obvious. I wonder what this game is like if you haven't played Journey or Flower. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |